So I think the point is, back in context, we all have festivals where public drinking is a thing. I mean, when I lived in Japan, we'd have Japan Day on base (for learning their culture) and American Day off base (for sharing ours) and there were plenty of drunks. I even got my first taste of beer on the off base one where there were throwing Sapporo off of a truck. Where public intoxication, to a degree, is legal, there are festivals!

And there are festivals where people are sober too! I don't think I'd think about drinking if I went to a Pride Parade! So his statement is actually false equivalence. *nods*

'Acting normal' is most definitely not 'don't do anything you wouldn't do at home'. It's a pretty ridiculous statement, actually. (NB: I shout, giggle, walk around in my underwear - or less! - at home, so ...)

The vagueness is still there.

And saying "These athletes will not be arrested for putting colors on their nails other than black or grey" is putting them above the law? Really? Do the police have so much free time on their hands that Russia is desperate to take a hard line on this? Surely they have better things to be doing.

Further, this ignores the fact that it's not just athletes who travel for the Games. Please stop ignoring the spectators, because without them, the Olympics wouldn't be the spectacle that it is. It would be just another match - only less so, because there would be no audience. Protections on the athletes are cool! But they are not the sole worry.

'Acting normal' is most definitely not 'don't do anything you wouldn't do at home'. It's a pretty ridiculous statement, actually. (NB: I shout, giggle, walk around in my underwear - or less! - at home, so ...)

The vagueness is still there.

And saying "These athletes will not be arrested for putting colors on their nails other than black or grey" is putting them above the law? Really? Do the police have so much free time on their hands that Russia is desperate to take a hard line on this? Surely they have better things to be doing.

Further, this ignores the fact that it's not just athletes who travel for the Games. Please stop ignoring the spectators, because without them, the Olympics wouldn't be the spectacle that it is. It would be just another match - only less so, because there would be no audience. Protections on the athletes are cool! But they are not the sole worry.

I think she was saying Home as in Home Country. To clarify. :)

It does say that Activists, which implies spectators, will also be protected. But that's why I asked for clarifications on definitions for words as the law in russia understands them.

So I think the point is, back in context, we all have festivals where public drinking is a thing. I mean, when I lived in Japan, we'd have Japan Day on base (for learning their culture) and American Day off base (for sharing ours) and there were plenty of drunks. I even got my first taste of beer on the off base one where there were throwing Sapporo off of a truck. Where public intoxication, to a degree, is legal, there are festivals!

And there are festivals where people are sober too! I don't think I'd think about drinking if I went to a Pride Parade! So his statement is actually false equivalence. *nods*

It's also a shrewd way of implying that homosexuality - or any kind of "non-traditional sexuality" is an illness and shameful behaviour - like rampant alcoholism and overdrinking.

While Time's habit of infantilizing the American news market is not exactly, well... news... actually the "America is weak and waffling" cover story is arguably the weaker of the two choices here. "An American President actually treats military action like the serious decision it is and consults Congress and the international community before proceeding, and then chooses to abide by some restriction to his power" is not exactly the stuff of what the Kidz like to call a sick burn.

That's not the point why I posted it here. It shows that Putin is more popular in the world and that he (and Lavrov, the foreign minister) prevented further escalation in Syria, not the US.

Aside from that, it shows how biased the American media are, which has shown by some comments posted in this topic about the Russian law that apparently no American knows the real truth about. They know what the American media are telling them, which is slightly related to the truth, but nowhere near what's actually happening.

American media post what they believe is good for America, whether or not it's related to being 'the truth' is completely irrelevant.

They are doing exactly what they accuse the Russian government of. They heard something about the anti propaganda law in Russia, immediately hyped it up without knowing anything about it and stated it as being truth and it's not just Time, judging by everybody's reaction here in this thread. As long as it's in favour of the USA, the rest of the world can go to hell.

That's not the point why I posted it here. It shows that Putin is more popular in the world

I'm far from sure that it does. What it shows is that Time's editors want to tell the world that Obama is "waffling" and Putin is being manly. That's absolutely not the same thing. It mainly reveals that they want to put more pressure on Obama to abandon the formalities and start bombing. I happen to think Obama actually deserves some credit for being resistant to this sort of fuckery.

While I agree with you, Cyrano, this narrative of Obama being vaguely pathetic and ineffectual in all this is pretty common over here. He hasn't come out of it overly well (which of cause will cost him that crucial UK vote in his next presidential election which he can't have anyway...). Jokes about how the ex-KGB tyrant has talked the Nobel Peace Prize winner out of war and so forth.

While I agree with you, Cyrano, this narrative of Obama being vaguely pathetic and ineffectual in all this is pretty common over here. He hasn't come out of it overly well (which of cause will cost him that crucial UK vote in his next presidential election which he can't have anyway...). Jokes about how the ex-KGB tyrant has talked the Nobel Peace Prize winner out of war and so forth.

*nods*

These are the guys Obama needs to talk to at present (I'm referring to what's mentioned in the lyrics, not to Ralf, Florian and co.)

While I agree with you, Cyrano, this narrative of Obama being vaguely pathetic and ineffectual in all this is pretty common over here. . . Jokes about how the ex-KGB tyrant has talked the Nobel Peace Prize winner out of war and so forth.

Yes, I do think Obama is correct to care more about doing the right thing than about who is currently making what jokes. Whether Putin gets deserved credit for spending political capital to carry a compromise forward, or whether he gets undeserved credit for coming up with a compromise that was actually not his idea, is less relevant than the actual outcome. A second-term President's eyes tend to be on posterity, which is a plus in circumstances like this one.

That's not the point why I posted it here. It shows that Putin is more popular in the world and that he (and Lavrov, the foreign minister) prevented further escalation in Syria, not the US.

Aside from that, it shows how biased the American media are, which has shown by some comments posted in this topic about the Russian law that apparently no American knows the real truth about. They know what the American media are telling them, which is slightly related to the truth, but nowhere near what's actually happening.

American media post what they believe is good for America, whether or not it's related to being 'the truth' is completely irrelevant.

They are doing exactly what they accuse the Russian government of. They heard something about the anti propaganda law in Russia, immediately hyped it up without knowing anything about it and stated it as being truth and it's not just Time, judging by everybody's reaction here in this thread. As long as it's in favour of the USA, the rest of the world can go to hell.

Which I wouldn't even mind so much but just be honest about it.

Because the people you have seen in this board rely only on American media for information... And not their internet friends from Russia... or the UK or anywhere near Russia. Because we haven't thrown many a Russian article or UK article at you. Because front page news might cater to the public but there are actually intelligent people over here who use the internet and find many sources! Also, there are many of us who are sick of Times catering to the general populous when there are those of us who actually want to learn what's going on out in the world. And we usually end up getting a copy of that article anyways. But Times is a magazine! And guess what a magazine's first job is? It's to sell! Not give out completely honest information.

As for Putin heading off the US and Obama not bombing that's another thread's subject.

Edit: I'd also like to point out that thus far this thread has been talking about the internal policies of Russia, not the international policies. Some people can have amazing internal policies and horrid external policies, and some people can have the opposite so that they don't get invaded. It's quite intelligent actually, on Putin's part.

I know that but how do you explain people here not knowing the first bit about this law and yet still spawning their opinion and calling Putin and the Russian government homophobic?

If these people would have used the internet first, they would know why and how this law was implemented and that asking to boycot the Olympics is just a (another) desperate cry from a certain 'minority community' to get attention to themselves and that it's got nothing to do with the law being unethical or whatever.

Fact of the matter is that every country has laws that are discriminating towards some folks and every country has at least one law that the international community doesn't like. I know a lot of Americans are very pleasant people and very smart and I have nothing against them. I do have something about the halfwits spreading lies on the internet (and this forum) about my home country, without having done any research on it.

Because, regardless of how prettily the law was worded, it's still a horrible law! It's banning the distribution of KNOWLEDGE! It's CENSORSHIP! And it's specifically saying that being gay is something that children who might possibly be queer or transgendered should have no knowledge about! And that it shouldn't be normal to see a girl and a girl or a guy and a guy out holding hands or hugging! So YES Dashenka, without a doubt, given the law, word for word translated, it IS a very very very HOMOPHOBIC law!

And the why and the how isn't really important to be honest! You want to understand why or how our gun laws came into existance? It's quite simple actually. A little over 2 centuries ago, an empire owned the american colonies that formed the US. And we didn't like that so we fought against them! And our founding fathers thought it wise to make SURE should the government get out of hands, there was a clause allowing us to form a militia and be able to arm the militias to fight against our government! The 2nd amendment is there to give the American people the RIGHT to PROTECT themselves FROM the government.

And quite simply put, any place that would put athletes in danger because of WHO THEY ARE (and not because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time since that's bound to happen on occasion regardless of locale) isn't OKAY at ALL! And while us complaining in this little corner of the internet isn't going to do anything to change the Olympic Committee's minds, I sure as hell am going to complain! Because I would love to go to Russia! I would love to go to a lot of places! But I AM NOT SAFE there because of who I LOVE! And that is NOT and NEVER WILL BE okay!

And yes, this law follows the general mindset of the people of Russia. I understand and get that. But you know what? Back during the US Civil War, it wasn't just the South that thought Slavery was okay! It was more than 50 percent of the populous! But people changed their mindset! And it took almost 100 more years for that to happen! And RACISM is STILL a PROBLEM! So this law, this law ENCOURAGING the IDEA that being GAY is something to be ASHAMED of? This law is allowing a mindset that might take another CENTURY AT LEAST to CHANGE!

I respect that Russia has the right to have their laws. I expect you to respect that I think those laws are DAMAGING the MINDSETS of CHILDREN! Because I don't want to go into statistics, but being put in that position of thinking that you are wrong? That something is fundamentally just WRONG with you? Do I really need to go into how harmful that is for a child's or teenager's development? Because I think you know how that feels. To think that something is absolutely wrong with you. Even when you find out that it's perfectly acceptable. And yes, Russia is allowed their law. And you want to know something, in the US and several other countries, WE are ALLOWED to PROTEST it. So I WILL take advantage of my FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT to PROTEST.

Because, regardless of how prettily the law was worded, it's still a horrible law! It's banning the distribution of KNOWLEDGE! It's CENSORSHIP! And it's specifically saying that being gay is something that children who might possibly be queer or transgendered should have no knowledge about! And that it shouldn't be normal to see a girl and a girl or a guy and a guy out holding hands or hugging! So YES Dashenka, without a doubt, given the law, word for word translated, it IS a very very very HOMOPHOBIC law!

And the why and the how isn't really important to be honest! You want to understand why or how our gun laws came into existance? It's quite simple actually. A little over 2 centuries ago, an empire owned the american colonies that formed the US. And we didn't like that so we fought against them! And our founding fathers thought it wise to make SURE should the government get out of hands, there was a clause allowing us to form a militia and be able to arm the militias to fight against our government! The 2nd amendment is there to give the American people the RIGHT to PROTECT themselves FROM the government.

No. I don't care about that law because it isn't my place to judge that law. If I think I'm in danger of being shot by going to hillbilly land and kiss my girlfriend on the street, I'll stay the fuck away. No matter how fascinating I might find that place.

And quite simply put, any place that would put athletes in danger because of WHO THEY ARE (and not because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time since that's bound to happen on occasion regardless of locale) isn't OKAY at ALL! And while us complaining in this little corner of the internet isn't going to do anything to change the Olympic Committee's minds, I sure as hell am going to complain! Because I would love to go to Russia! I would love to go to a lot of places! But I AM NOT SAFE there because of who I LOVE! And that is NOT and NEVER WILL BE okay!

And yes, this law follows the general mindset of the people of Russia. I understand and get that. But you know what? Back during the US Civil War, it wasn't just the South that thought Slavery was okay! It was more than 50 percent of the populous! But people changed their mindset! And it took almost 100 more years for that to happen! And RACISM is STILL a PROBLEM! So this law, this law ENCOURAGING the IDEA that being GAY is something to be ASHAMED of? This law is allowing a mindset that might take another CENTURY AT LEAST to CHANGE!

Athletes are perfectly safe in Russia at the Olympics. You are perfectly safe in Russia as long as you respect the traditions and rules of Russia. Nothing different from other counties. If you go to India, you don't wear shorts and you take off your shoes in a temple. When you visit the Blue Mosque in Turkey, you cover your hair as a women. It's called respect. People in Russia have nothing against gay people, they just don't want you to show it off.

I respect that Russia has the right to have their laws. I expect you to respect that I think those laws are DAMAGING the MINDSETS of CHILDREN! Because I don't want to go into statistics, but being put in that position of thinking that you are wrong? That something is fundamentally just WRONG with you? Do I really need to go into how harmful that is for a child's or teenager's development? Because I think you know how that feels. To think that something is absolutely wrong with you. Even when you find out that it's perfectly acceptable. And yes, Russia is allowed their law. And you want to know something, in the US and several other countries, WE are ALLOWED to PROTEST it. So I WILL take advantage of my FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT to PROTEST.

I don't want to go as far as to call it damaging for children but I don't agree with the law either. You can protest it, but protest something you know all the details about. Don't go protesting something you've heard on the news without knowing what it is you are protesting.

People in this topic seem to think that Russia has banned everybody to be gay, which isn't the case. You can be gay, you can have sex all you want. All the law says, is NOT to do it in a public place, which I think is quite reasonable and not to pretend that being gay is the best thing in the world, like Jehova witnesses and Mormons do. Claiming their way is best. Those two are very reasonable statements in a country that is still very religious.

Athletes are perfectly safe in Russia at the Olympics. You are perfectly safe in Russia as long as you respect the traditions and rules of Russia. Nothing different from other counties. If you go to India, you don't wear shorts and you take off your shoes in a temple. When you visit the Blue Mosque in Turkey, you cover your hair as a women. It's called respect. People in Russia have nothing against gay people, they just don't want you to show it off.

Basically, you're right. You respect the country you're visiting and their laws. This is true. However, your examples are false equivalence for me. I think Turkey is just as bad and in some respects worse. If this was moving the summer olympics from turkey? I'd be all on that ship six years ago when it was initially brought into the picture. As for India, those are Universal laws though. And they're not censoring anyone by saying that you just don't wear shorts and you take off your shoes in a temple. It's a dress code that is universal no matter gender or sexuality. The issue we are discussing is something targeting a group of people, not a dress code.

I don't want to go as far as to call it damaging for children but I don't agree with the law either. You can protest it, but protest something you know all the details about. Don't go protesting something you've heard on the news without knowing what it is you are protesting.

Don't assume that we haven't done research. The law has been a bit shady and I said in my first post in this thread that I wasn't sure about how the law would turn out and that all I cared about was people's safety.

People in this topic seem to think that Russia has banned everybody to be gay, which isn't the case. You can be gay, you can have sex all you want. All the law says, is NOT to do it in a public place, which I think is quite reasonable and not to pretend that being gay is the best thing in the world, like Jehova witnesses and Mormons do. Claiming their way is best. Those two are very reasonable statements in a country that is still very religious.

And yet, we in the US allow Jehova witnesses and Mormons, as annoying as they are, to teach people their ways. Hell, I plan on teaching any children I may have or adopt these two religions and many more. I am saying, if a straight couple is allowed to show affection, I should be allowed the same level of affection. Equality is all I ask for. So if an American couple goes to Russia and kiss, it doesn't matter whether they are straight or gay. There are the same consequences. I'm not asking for anyone to think I'm better. I'm asking for people to think I'm equal.

I have just explained what the law is. Many people, especially earlier on in the discussion had no idea what it really meant.

You say Jehova's and all teach other people their ways. Why? Is our way not good? Is their way the only good way? I find it offensive when they come to my door teaching me about something other than my own religion. They have their ways, I respect that but for Christ sake stop education the whole world to your ways thinking they are best.

As for showing affection on the street. I'm not sure if I'm old fashioned or something (I probably am) but when I see a couple french kissing at the subway station, I get annoyed. Straight, gay, black, white I don't care. That kind of affection should be done at home. Not in public where everybody can see you.

Personally, being gay, I don't give a flying rat's ass what people think of me and if they treat me like equal or not. I care about the people that care about me and people who don't treat me like I would treat them, can sink to their graves for all I care.

Why is it so important to you (and others) for people you don't know to treat you as equal?

That said, I think equality is a fairytale. Not just on races, sexuality and religion but on everything. That guy that kidnapped those two women in the US. He keeps them against their will, rapes them, gets a child from one and then hangs himself in his cell. Is he equal to us? Certainly not to me, I am way better in everything than he was.

Stop caring what other people think about you or how they treat you. I'm sure you got better things to spend your energy on :)

That said, I think equality is a fairytale. Not just on races, sexuality and religion but on everything. That guy that kidnapped those two women in the US. He keeps them against their will, rapes them, gets a child from one and then hangs himself in his cell. Is he equal to us? Certainly not to me, I am way better in everything than he was.

However, he was treated equally by the laws in that he received a trial by jury just like anyone in the US is entitled to. He, like anyone else, was entitled to a lawyer and a jury, and the right not to incriminate himself - or to speak in his own defense if he chose. Personally, I think he got off easy when the guards slipped up and he was left alone long enough to kill himself, but the law treated him like any other person when he was tried and sentenced.

You see, the reason that equality should be a thing, is so that people can be safe. So that you're not targeted just because you are something you were born as. Because yeah, I shouldn't care what others think. But I shouldn't have to put energy towards defending myself against guys who think that a good fuck will "cure" me. Because I shouldn't have to put energy towards defending myself against being beat to death. I shouldn't have to spend energy comforting someone who came out to their parents only to be rejected. Or spend energy crying because another teenager committed suicide because they've been harassed and bullied because of their sexuality.

So instead (or rather in addition), I'll focus my energy on changing these things so that these type of things don't happen to my children, or my children's children. Ensuring that this world is a safe place for them to come out and be who they are.

And I'm not talking about french kissing. I'm talking about a peck on the lips, or a chaste kiss. Because that's what I'm worried about. Because in the US, you see a woman and a woman holding hands and occasionally hugging and giving each other small kisses, they're gay. And you don't even have to give small kisses for it to be considered true with guys. Holding hands is something young children and couples do in the US, occasionally female friends, though those tend to have a different feel to them then the couples.

Also, people have been rounded up and killed for being a certain way. And while that's not likely to happen any time soon, I'd like you to keep that in mind while you spout off this stuff about equality not being important, the government can make laws against minorities and sometimes they will get passed. Once again I'm going to bring up the south in the US until about the 1960's. :) Because I rather enjoy sitting where I want and eating where I want don't you?

Which he shouldn't. Because he was a lesser being from us. Equality is a dream.

Until you hear about the people tried and convicted by the jury of heinous crimes only to find out they're innocent years later. :) Yeah. Thanks for assuming they're lesser people even though they've done nothing wrong.

Yes, now that it's proven he's done these crimes, we can say he's a lesser person, thus him losing a LOT (read all) of his rights. :) But until then, he's still a human being and deserves to be treated as so.

Yeah. Equality is a dream, but dreams are things to strive for. You seem to have lost sight of that aspect.

I'll rather focus my energy on living my life and not on things or people or countries I cannot change, no matter how noble the quest.

My life is interesting enough to spend time worrying and fighting for things I have no control over. Letting my voice be heard only works on people who want to listen.

When I know I offend people by holding hands or kissing my girlfriend, I won't do it in front of them. My grandparents for example. They accept me, they love me to death and they like and accept my girlfriend. They just don't want us kissing or holding hands and all that. So rather than trying to change the way they have been living for 90 and 93 years, I spend my energy on different things. Like my girlfriend.

Who am I to say how they should live their lives? I don't want them to judge me so why would I judge them? You don't like people telling you who or what to accept or belief, so why are you doing exactly that? Where is the equality in that?

Who am I to say how they should live their lives? I don't want them to judge me so why would I judge them? You don't like people telling you who or what to accept or belief, so why are you doing exactly that? Where is the equality in that?

This is a great post, if everyone stopped worrying what everyone else thinks about them, the world would be a better place.